Admissibility of confessional statements, caution in recording judicial confession, and proof of exclusive access in cases of circumstantial evidence.

JOYMALYA BAGCHI, J.

1. The appeal is directed against the judgment and order of conviction and sentence dated 27th and 28th January, 2015 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, 17th Court, Alipore, South 24-Paraganas in Sessions Trial No. 04(11)2013 arising out of Sessions Case No.73(06)2013 convicting the appellant for commission of offence punishable under Sections 302/309 of the Indian Penal Code and sentencing her to suffer imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/- in default to suffer simple imprisonment for further two months for the offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and to suffer simple imprisonment for three months for the offence punishable under Section 309 of the Indian Penal Code. Both the sentences to run concurrently.

2. Gist of the prosecution case levelled against the appellant is to the effect that on 4.1.2013, the appellant and her son Deep Sharma were admitted to M. R. Bangur Hospital with a history of poisoning. On the report of her husband, Babul Shamra (who was not examined in the present case), Tapas Karmakar, Sub Inspector of Police attached to Patuli Police Station, P.W.2 came to the hospital and recorded the statement of the appellant who was struggling for survival. The appellant allegedly revealed that she had matrimonial dispute with her husband on financial and other issues. Her husband had married another woman. There were quarrels between them and she was under severe depression. As a result, she took a decision to end her life and that of her son. Accordingly, on 3.1.2013 around 6.30 P.M. she mixed poison in the milk of the child and fed him. She also consumed the poisoned milk. Her husband removed them to M. R. Bangur Hospital where her son was declared dead and she admitted in the said hospital. On the basis of the aforesaid declaration made by the appellant to the police officer incriminating herself in the murder of her son, P.W.2 lodged first information report being Patuli P. S. Case No.12 dated 4.1.2013 under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code against her. The appellant was arrested and in conclusion of investigation, charge sheet was filed against her. The case was committed to the court of sessions and transferred to the court of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, 17th Court, Alipore, South 24-Paraganas for trial and disposal. Charges were framed under Sections 302/309 of the Indian Penal Code against the appellant. The appellant pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

3. Prosecution examined 13 witnesses and exhibited a number of documents. Defence of the appellant was one of innocence and false implication. In conclusion of trial, the trial judge by judgment and order dated 27.01.2015 and 28.01.2015 convicted and sentenced the appellant, as aforesaid.

4. Mr. Chatterjee, learned Advocate appearing for the appellant argued that the trial judge had convicted the appellant on the basis of inadmissible evidence. Ext.1 recorded by a police officer is a self-incriminating statement which is inadmissible in terms of Section 25 of the Evidence Act. Apart from the aforesaid exhibit, there is no direct evidence connecting the appellant with the alleged murder. Hence, the appellant is entitled to be acquitted.

5. On the other hand, Mr. Sur, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the State submitted that the contents of Ext.1, statement made by the appellant to the police officer, is corroborated by other independent evidence. In the course of investigation, the container and poisoned milk were recovered from the room of the appellant. Subsequent recoveries corroborates the confessional statement of the appellant and, therefore, the same does not suffer from vice of inadmissibility. The appellant was alone with the victim in the room and, therefore, adverse inference was rightly drawn against her as she failed to explain how her son consumed poison.

6. From the rival submissions made across the Bar and on an anal